However bad you feel about racism, no need to joke about it in your newspaper. And say, “I have learned to stop worrying and start loving racism”. And he is an opinion maker. Just look at what the writer wrote in the article below.

Then the Malaysian Insider banged Tun Dr Mahathir with the racist label. They exploited what TDM said when explaining his position in relation to Perkasa recently. TDM is racist for more than just Perkasa, said they. See the next article below.

We, of course, disagree. We’ll give our explanations and our views in our replies to comments readers make as we go along in here. Now, before anybody starts accusing us of being TDM lackeys, we state it loud and clear – that we are are not beholden to anybody but ourselves, as concerned citizens wanting unity and the emergence of a united and cohesive Bangsa Malaysia in this country.

Racist accusations, counter-accusations, calling for amendments to Bumi housing discount, even daring to call for the abolition of the 30% Bumi equity target – all these have increased racial polarisation further. In the midst of all these we came across what a writer wrote in Utusan Malaysia months ago – saying “‘Perang besar’ boleh berlaku di Malaysia jika kerajaan gagal menangani isu perkauman yang bebas diperdebatkan secara terbuka sekarang”.

And a few days ago another article appeared in Utusan Malaysia saying the Ministry of Home Affairs should show “signals” to the public not to argue or debate (“pertikai”) the Constitution – the sensitive Clauses, that is. Those that are protected under the Sedition Act.

Then a Sin Chew writer talks about the Sino-India (Indo?) equation in Malaysia. With some 4,000 years of history both China and India have, China especially, has finally made the “Great Leap Forward” – to borrow Mao Zedong’s terminology used during his disastrous economic programme of the 1960s. China prioritises economy instead of democracy, whereas India prioritises democracy, instead of economy, says the writer.

The writer exhorts Malaysia to take the advice of Japanese strategist Kenichi Ohmae that “if Malaysia can take advantage of its strategic location in the region, integrate its multi-racial society, and fully use its advantage of having large Chinese and Indian populations to strengthen relations with the software-based high-technology industries of India on one hand and build a closer tie with the knowledge-intensive industries of China on the other hand, no one will dare to ignore its economic development power by then”.

My original title for this article should have been Titiwangsa or: How I learned to stop worrying and love racism.

Sounding weird, isn’t it? What the hell is it?

Sorry, I could have got excessively intoxicated by Stanley Kubrick, whose Dr.Strangelove or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb talked about the narrow nationalism and threats of nuclear bombs during the Cold War era.

Under the influence of his ideological education, an aggressive American general initiated the nuclear warhead to launch attack on Soviet targets, sending the world in utter annihilation.

Nuclear bombs are too dangerous and should not have existed in the first place. But thanks to politics, they had become a tool for the manipulation of world leaders and everyone just fell in love with them.

Kubrick successfully made such a dry and gloomy topic into a comedy, one that the industry has labelled the most outstanding satire ever made in human history.

Even the title of the movie itself became a popular pun during those years. And the same is still applicable in the Malaysian context today. For instance, Namewee should perhaps write another song titled : How I learned to stop saying “Nah” and sing “Hallelujah,” while Encik Jamal should rephrase his words: How I learned to stop saying Chinese education is bullshit and love the Dongjiaozhong.

I checked with the “Johari: We don’t need Chinese and Indian votes” on Youtube and found that the clip has been visited more than 300,000 times, a whole lot more than Namewee’s “Nah!”

Johari has apologised twice, but he also said the clip was altered and fabricated by some ill-intentioned people and that he had never been a racist himself, adding that Titiwangsa Umno indeed needed Chinese and Indian votes more now than ever.

Since he was no racist, and that the video clip had been altered and fabricated, it was indeed too harsh on him to get him apologise two times.

Why on earth has someone publicised speeches supposedly held behind closed doors, and why did people choose to hold two by-elections at such a timing?

Why Ahmad Ismail did not need to apologise back then, and Johari needed to do it twice?

Why could people sing racism loudly in the past, but even doing it behind closed doors now is strictly forbidden?

Time has changed. Yes, people are getting more intelligent and ballots become important now. Racism has been given a new, politically correct definition.

People used to stay away from racist talks, but now the same can become a topic to joke about.

Dr M dubbed racist for more than just Perkasa — The Malaysian Insider
November 02, 2010

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad today wondered why he is being regarded a racist for his association with Perkasa, the Malay rights group.

The former prime minister defended his links with the Datuk Ibrahim Ali vehicle, saying he wanted to ensure Perkasa would continue to support the Barisan Nasional (BN) in the next general election.

The author of the one-time controversial “The Malay Dilemma” also said he could have been a racist a while ago but it did not happen.

“I had at one time the opportunity and power to be a real Malay racist. But I won elections with strong non-Malay support. In fact in 1999 it was Chinese support which gave me my two-thirds majority.

“I was obviously not regarded as a racist then (except of course by the DAP). So why am I regarded as a racist now when all I want to do is to ensure Malay support for Barisan Nasional parties, especially Umno,” the blunt politician asked in posting at his popular blog.

To be fair to the country’s fourth prime minister, there is nothing wrong in ensuring support for BN and in particular Umno. After all he was the founding president of Umno Baru in 1988. Not the original Umno born in 1946 but declared illegal in 1988 after one of its most divisive party elections.

No, Dr Mahathir can exercise the freedom of association enshrined in the Federal Constitution. As the rest of Malaysia can with any party that they support.

But no one is labelling Dr Mahathir a racist because of his association with the likes of Ibrahim, the maverick politician who says he has friends from across all Malaysian communities.

No, not for that. It is probably is due to comments Dr Mahathir has made since Election 2008. Among which is at a meeting in May 2008 where he flashed the race card, warning the Malays that they stood to lose much in the new political environment where the non-Malays were unafraid to make demands.

“If we don’t speak up, if we choose to keep quiet, we will lose our rights and the other races will take over,” he told some 1,000 people at a gathering in Johor Baru then.

Dr Mahathir had asked the audience whether anyone of them had read the memorandum forwarded by the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) to the government. “What does it say? Malaysia for Malaysians! This is the reality of the present situation. If we do not speak up, if we choose to keep quiet, we will lose our rights and the other races will take over. When that happens, it will be like Singapore. Do you think we will still have control?” he pondered.

If anything, the man who coined the term Bangsa Malaysia in his Vision 2020 document “The Way Forward” in 1991 has moved to the right. Not because of Perkasa but even before Perkasa was a thought in the mind of Ibrahim.

The other reason is also simple. Perkasa and its sympathisers including Dr Mahathir have consistently tried to hijack the national discourse by saying that non-Malays are threatening Article 153 which contains 10 clauses.

The first clause simply reads “It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.”

No one has questioned the clause but Perkasa and others have taken umbrage and have vowed to defend it.

In fact the tactic is interesting as Perkasa and supporters love to stigmatise words and phrases such as meritocracy,

Dr Mahathir is one of them. On August 24, his post “Is Meritocracy Racist” contained these lines: “What we are seeing today is not a campaign against racism but a campaign by racists against racists. The meritocrats are as much racists as the Malay NGOs, and Perkasa.

“Incidentally by writing this I know the meritocrat racists will condemn me as racist. So be it,” he said emphatically.

So, if non-Malays now cast Dr Mahathir as a racist, it is because he is unrecognisable from the Malaysian leader who once talked about Bangsa Malaysia and meritocracy and about the crutch mentality among Malays.

China and India are ancient civilisations, and from AD1 to AD1820, they were the world’s two largest economies.

However, Western countries have dominated the world over the past few hundred years while China and India suffered a long-term decline. China was humiliated by the invasion launched by the Eight-Nation Alliance while India had become a British colony. The peoples of China and India had experienced the plight of being weak nations.

When we talked about the economic powers of merely 30 years ago, not many people would think about China and India. At that time, China was half dead after being ruined by the chaotic Cultural Revolution while India was then a synonym for the words meaning poor, dirty, chaotic and backward.

But the situation has change. Today, despite the serious gap between rich and poor, Chinese dragons and Indian elephants have become the most representative symbols of rapid economic growth.

The world has changed and Asia has risen. China and India are now back to the world stage and listed as among the four major world powers, alongside the United States and the European Union. It is an undeniable fact that world has undergone a great power shift towards the East.

The economies of China and India have been rapidly growing over the past 30 years. The two ancient civilisations used to have many similar experiences but they have chosen two totally different paths to achieve modernisation.

China has a one-party dictatorship governmental system. Although it lacks a democratic system, it has chosen a path that prioritises economy instead of democracy.

As for India, it pursues the democratic electoral system, and is known as the world’s largest democratic country. It is a typical model of a country that prioritises democracy, instead of economy.

The two giant ancient Asian civilisations pursuing two different systems have actually got rid of decline together and with different approaches, they are not now riding high on the road of prosperity. It is a competition between two different systems, as well as a kind of demonstration for the Third World. It is certainly something good for the promotion of world and stability.

Some people are worried that the simultaneous rise of two powers might trigger new conflicts. It is indeed an experience of human history, but it is not a necessity. After the World War II, Europe countries have basically maintained zero war and the long-term peace had guaranteed their prosperity and progress. If the Europeans are able to do it, why can’t Asians?

For Malaysia, the rise of China and India is a great opportunity. Renowned Japanese strategist Kenichi Ohmae pointed out that if Malaysia can take advantage of its strategic location in the region, integrate its multi-racial society, and fully use its advantage of having large Chinese and Indian populations to strengthen relations with the software-based high-technology industries of India on one hand and build a closer tie with the knowledge-intensive industries of China on the other hand, no one will dare to ignore its economic development power by then.

Yes, the opportunity may be fleeting and it all depends on us to grasp it!

Related

Actions

Information

36 responses

7112010

Wira(21:00:03) :

Hit at racism, man.

Spell out what racism is. Look at the dictionary, state the examples, quote the cases, find out the causes and effects, call for Government action, including on those calling for abolition of Bumi equity target.

Indeed, the Sin Chew writer should be hitting at racism, not saying he’s in love with racism. Because racism is such a major issue in this country, any joke on it is lost in the reading. It’s simply is not funny. However famous a writer (is he famous, anyway?) is being quoted in the process. Private jokes are the business of those concerned but jokes in newspapers are not – they are public statements and such jokes become a poor reflection of the newspapers concerned and when printed, are done so in poor taste.

Racism is where there is antagonism towards another race. Asking for Bumi equity target be abolished is certainly racist because it seeks to deprive the Bumis of what they hope to get and that surely antagonises the Malays and the Bumiputeras of Sabah and sarawak. Especially when those who ask belong to the community that has vast wealth in the country and control the economy. The community that can enjoy, and has been enjoying, most of the benefits of the economic infrastructure provided by the Government because they are the majority in business.

As has been pointed out somewhere, there was no racism in this country before the non-Malays were brought in by the British colonial powers to work in the tin mines and the rubber plantations. It may be arguable as to who started the racist issues but, after Merdeka, it has a lot has to do with respecting the Constitution which provides that Bahasa Malaysia is the National Language and that the Malays and the Bumiputeras of Sabah and Sarawak have a Special Position in this country. Non-acceptance of such provisions of the Constitution and non-respecting the Constitution has led to the use of the term “pendatang” or new arrivals or visitors.

By itself, the word explains a historical fact. It becomes objectionable when it is used with intent to chide or even humiliate those concerned. The writer could well use his time and the resources of the newspaper he works for to trace the beginnings of the use of the word “pendatang” and any other words or instances which can be called racist. Then speak, with hard evidence, and repeatedly where necessary, exhorting the public to refrain from such acts. That would have been a responsible thing to do. That would have contributed to bringing about goodwill, understanding and harmony in this country.

Those causing racial polarisation exist in all communities. Let’s just try and stop all of them without pointing fingures. The less we accuse the less the reactions. Let’s just try and talk about how to bring unity and peace among us.

It’ true that extremists exist in every community and that we need to move on. But at the same time stern action needs to be taken on them to deter others from doing the same.

In many cases, events occurred as reactions to those who initiated raising issues. The matter of stimulus and response in human behaviour. The natural consequences of seditious acts. As some one has pointed out, there was no racism in this country before non-Malays came. Then independence came and the Constitution was passed by Parliament. Some say certain sensitive provisions in the Constitution are racist. Surely the Malays cannot be faulted for the sensitive issues being in the Constitution of the country.

Such sensitive issues pertain to the Special Position of the Malays and the Bumiputeras of Sabah and Sarawak. They were in exchange for the citiznship right of the non-Malays, which has also become a sensitive issue. The first time it was raised was when Lee Kuan Yew conceived of the so-called Malaysian Malaysia slogan when Simgapore was in Malaysia. It asked for equal rights without acknowledging the Special Position of the Malays and the Bumis.

Now the DAP Tony Pua wants to have the Bumiputera husing discount be amended and the MCA President Chua Soi Lek wants the 30% Bumi equity target be abolished. Highly seditious as they crate ill feelings among the Malays and the Bumiputeras of Sabah and Sarawak. A lot of these antagonims and seditious statements against the Malays and the Bumis stem from the lack of knowledge of the history of this country. We need to move on but Tony Pua and the MCA jumped up making unacceptable statements the moment DPM and MOE Tan Sri Muhyiddin announced the decision making History compulsory in schools.

They must be responsible, not be jumpy and talk about “indoctrination”, “narrow interpretation” of the Constitution, etc. They should at least wait until after details on the decision are announced. They should be charged for the seditious remarks referred to earlier. Chua has been called to the Police station but we are awaiting to see the outcome.

When you fight tooth and nail for your vernacular schools in this land called Malaysia and when you, without having an iota of sense of respect, go on babbling your mother tongue languages in public, knowing very well there exist article of the Constitution concerning Bahasa Kebangsaan,

There are the ignorant ones, having hardly a clue about the Constitution, about loyalty, nationalism, patriotism, even very poor knowledge about the history of the country. Some of them do think that Malaysia started with Merdeka by which their parents or grand parents became citizens and they got the inalienable right by virtue of Merdeka and nothing else.

That is why the DPM and MOE Tan Sri Muhyiddin’s decision to make History a compulsory subject in schools was very timely and highly applauded. But then there are the educated ones who know a little about the history of this country but are pursuing a chauvinistic, self-alienating political or other agenda and choose to disregard certain clauses of he Constitution. Some are simply chauvinistic, period. The Dong Zong have talked about multiple nations and many nations within a nation nonsense. It’s plainly and clearly non respect of Article 152 because Bahasa Malaysia is the National Language, it is the Official Language, and schools are the official business of any country and, in Malaysia all schools should have Bahasa Malaysia as the medium of instruction – not Mandarin or Tamil.

Let us keep on asking all Malaysians to think about the country they are living in, that they are citizens of, that they should show loyalty to, feel nationalistic and patriotic about. Let’s urge the Education Ministry to ensure that the Constitution be an integral and an important part of the History subject in schools when implemented as compulsory in 2013. That they also include teaching what respect for the Constitution is, about loyalty, nationalism and patriotism.

The Malaysian Insider writer began his article by using the correct terms – “Perkasa, the Malay rights group”. Why the hell does he then start rambling about Perkasa and TDM being racist?

He said, “It is probably is due to comments Dr Mahathir has made since Election 2008. Among which is at a meeting in May 2008 where he flashed the race card, warning the Malays that they stood to lose much in the new political environment where the non-Malays were unafraid to make demands”. Saying “flashed the race card”? “warning the Malays”? Are those not harsh words to use? Is TDM racist by saying those?

The writer then quoted TDM saying, “If we don’t speak up, if we choose to keep quiet, we will lose our rights and the other races will take over”. Saying those make TDM racist? For goodness sake, man, read up what being racist is. Don’t be glib and simply say rabid nonsense.

It has already been explained here and elsewhere that racism is where there is antagonism towards other races. One is not antagonistic when one speaks for and tries to promote the rights of one’s race. Otherwise all racially-based political parties are racist. And no single political party can be considered as not racially based – their articles of association may sound multi-racial but their membership and leadership composition, as well as their political agenda are all in fact racially inclined.

For so long as they don’t engage in any activity antagonistic to other races, speak or try to deny others their rights and privileges, they are not racist. Those promoting the so-called Malaysian Malaysia slogan want equality but are not acknowledging that the Malays and the Bumiputeras of Sabah and Sarawak have a Special Position written in the Constitution. And they are against the New Economic Policy which was designed to let the Malays and the Bumis, who form nearly 70% of this country, catch up a little with the 23% Chinese who own vast wealth and control the economy of the country. They were left far behind largely due to the 80 years of British colonial policy in this country. They are antagonistic to the Malays and are racist by doing those.

Urging the Malays to speak up and not just keep quiet, in order that the Malay rights are protected, is certainly not racist. If the Malays lose their rights, naturally the non-Malays would take over. There’s nothing sinister or racist in saying so. It’s the natural sequence of events that Tun Dr Mahathir was trying to tell the Malays, so that they be aware and will safeguard their rights.

Malaysian Insider is owned by the opposition. They sometimes say anything that would put the Establishment down in the eyes of the public. TDM is a member of the Establishment, having been PM for 22 years. The public should be aware of the gullibility of news potals like Malaysian Insider.

Zaid Stays Out Of PKR Number Two Race, Quits Party Posts
Bernama – ‎40 minutes ago‎
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 8 (Bernama) — Datuk Zaid Ibrahim has withdrawn from the race for Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) deputy presidency and quit all party posts, describing the party as being hypocritical and having false values.

Hope UMNO wont take him back even if he wants to rejoin. This kind will go hopping endlessly. Will not be a help to the Malay cause at all.

Will be opposite of racist. There you go, stretching it to be in topic, haha.

Readers in bureacracy say that when civil servants disagree, they are to state their views, then carry out whatever is decided by the Political Masters (some still linger with their objections and Dato Seri Najib had to cry out with calls for “Innovation” among the Civil Service, now he has his policies more clearly spelt out by having the ETP). But when politicians disagree, if they disagree strongly on major issues, they should resign. Hence, even in highly advanced Western countries, Winston Churchill resigned and changed parties.

Politicians used to resign on matters of principle. But in Malaysia one often wonders how many politicians have principles or stick to those they say they subscribe to. Especially when it is said that there is a lot of money in frog hopping.

In the Philippines, political party hopping had become a common feature since 30-40 years ago. Now Malaysia has caught on with it. Perhaps started by Zaid Ibrahim’s boss, Anwar Ibrahim. Anwar promised the country a party-hopping coup d’etat in September 2008. It never happened. But party hopping-out occurred in Perak and it resulted in the Pakatan Rakyat losing the state government and the Barisan National coming into power by a tiny majority.

Zaid has not left his new party, PKR. Just his posts in PKR. It is to be seen whether he has the patience to ride it out with those he claims have been resorting to unfair means to win party posts. In UMNO, his colleagues did not warm up to his ways. In PKR he may not warm up to their ways. He might have burnt his bridge as far as UMNO is concerned. But he has a lot of money to sustain in whatever he wants to do. Let’s see whether he has has a lot of patience.

If you want to follow the Japanese way, no such thing as integration. Just assimilation. Even that does not work for them in Japan. The Koreans and the Chinese residents there continue to be called “gaijin” (foreigners). Will be forever. Forget about equal rights. You take it or you leave it.

The sense of superiority over the Chinese still there. 2nd World War and before. They lost the War to the Allied forces but rose again in economy in only 20 years. Only 100 million people compared to China 1,000 million. Been No.2 economy for a long time. Now sure jealous China getting to be No. 2. Already fighting over some islands south of Japan.

The Japanese are a homogeneous society, having only a smattering of immigrant Chinese, Koreans and others. The Japanese are said to have the same origin as the Chinese, though they believe their Emperor is descended from the sun, hence its portrayal in their national flag. The Japanese have isolated themselves for ages, allowing outside contacts only after the Meiji Restoration in the 19th Century. Integration is not a problem for them.

China is a huge land mass, peopled by a mixture of tribes said to have originated from the Mongolian steppes and the north eastern frontier. According to Professor C.P Ftizgerald, the south was originally settled by tribes called the Tais and others that later on were displaced by the northerners migrating southwards. The southerners were less developed, the people considered disadvantaged compared to the northerners and the Manchu Emperors gave them the “tongkat” by reserving 25% of the Civil Service posts for them. Despite that, rebellions, protests and demonstrations occurred relatively frequently in the south. Integration has been a problem for the southern Chinese. Only months ago they had demonstrations in Canton and Hong Kong against the Central Government enforcing the use of their official language, Mandarin. The Malaysian Chinese are descended from the the mainland southern Chinese.

For lack of integration, China has been weak for a long, long time. They were conquered by the Manchus (Manchuria became a part of China only after World War II) who ruled them for a few hundred years until the early 20th Century. The Japanese invaded them and stayed in Manchuria (then regarded as a part of Manchu-ruled China) for some time. The Japanese bullied them during World War II until they surrendered at the end of that war at the hands of the Allied Forces.

The Japanese do have a sense of superiority over the Chinese. But because of Japan’s war-renouncing Constitution, Japan cannot have an “armed forces” and arm themselves with nuclear weapons of all sorts. They only have “self-defence forces” and rely on the Americans for nuclear capability. Whereas China may think they are superior to the Japanese because of nuclear weapons possession.

The moral of the story is – integrate and a people can become stronger. So, if the non-Malays in Malaysia readily integrate, all Malaysian citizens become a truly cohesive Bangsa Malaysia, this country will become strong.

Quoting the case of Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) is racist? Where does he learn the word racist? Mahathir cannot ask the Malays to speak up? He cannot ask the Malays to protect our rights? What utter rubbish!

Tun Dr Mahathir held a pretty tight rein on the wayward characters in this country such that very few dared to utter seditious words. But “flip flopping, auto-piloting and sleepy” Tun Abdullah Badawi allowed almost everybody to say almost anything they liked, and Dato Ser Najib now appears to be following suit, such that non-Bumiputeras even started highly seditious statements and actions like proposing amendments to the Bumi housing discount, and worse still, ask for the Bumi equity target be abolished.

Sedition is where words and utterances cause ill feelings, breed hatred and harsh reactions from other races. Such words and actions as uttered by Tony Pua and a resolution made by the MCA Economic Congress certainly led to many Malays reacting by calling for their citizenship rights to be abolished as well. All those created very unpleasant atmosphere and widen the racial gap much further.

Now they appear to be continuing to say what they like. Even TDM quoting the racist Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) is called being racist. When his intention was merely to draw the attention of the Malays on the need to defend and protect the rights of the Malays. Racism is where there is antagonism against other races. Where is the antagonism in TDM asking the Malays to speak up and protect their rights.

Many of those claiming to be Malaysians do not know the history of this country and the background of the Constitution. Let us hope that, with History being made a compulsory subject in schools beginning from 2013, the younger generations will know and understand well the contribution, the role and the place in Malaysian society of the various races now existing. All Malaysians are equal under the law but in Malaysia the highest law of the country i.e the Constitution says that the Malays and the Bumiputeras of Sabah abd Sarawak have a Special Position.

When they understand that fully, there will be less criticisms on NEP and the privileges given to the Malays in order to catch up with the Chinese. The Malays were left far behind the Chinese economically and educationally, not being given assistance and encouragement, like those given to the Chinese by the British colonial masters. The British wanted the Malays to continue being rice farmers and fishermen, to “look after the food production” of the country. The huge economic and educational imbalance needs to be changed.

There is no problem at all in speaking for Chinese, Indians’ and others’ rights. The important point is that speaking so must not appear seditious and racist. As explained earlier, sedition is where it denies other’s their rights and create creates ill feelings. And racism is where what are being spoken antagonise or offend other races.

The rights of the non-Malays are clearly spelt out in the Constitution. But having schools conducted with Mandarin as the medium of instruction is not a Chinese right. And saying this is not seditious or racist. Because Article 152 of the Constitution is clear – Bahasa Malaysia is the National Language. It is also the Official Languae and all schools should use Bahasa Malaysia as the medium of instruction as schools, in any country, are the official business of the country.

The Article provides that “mother tongue” can be taught and used. Mandarin is not mother tongue but non-Chinese do not mind Chinese wanting to learn it. But it must not be the medium of instruction in schools. It can be learnt as an elective subject and can be used in private interaction. These arguments have been furnished time and again and we will continue furnishing them on and on until all Malaysians accept the fact there must be single-stream schooling in this country.

The fact that Chinese schools exist since British time does not make it right. The political leaders have not solved the problem of vernacular schools when the Constitution was adopted after Merdeka. It lingered on for over 50 years. But the fact remains that it is not right having schools using other than Bahasa Malaysia as the medium of instruction. This is so from the point of view of the Constitution and the need for togetherness, mutual understanding, harmony and unity in the country.

“It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.” –

The Malaysian Insider says, “No one has questioned the clause but Perkasa and others have taken umbrage and have vowed to defend it”.

Where have they been all these while? What’s racist in defending the clause? Warped minds, aren’t they?

The Malaysian Insider is owned by the Opposition and is out to show to their readers their anti-establishment views. It even uses big words like “umbrage” to confuse the average reader – the word means, slight or injury, or offense. Indeed slight or offense has been taken when, for example, there are people who even criticise the Sultan of Perak when exercising his discretion in the constitutional crisis resulting from the “katak lompat” incidents some time back. Yet some comments even suggest that the Sultans do not have any work or responsibilities, that they merely push pens to paper. These are problems arising from an acute lack of knowledge of the Constitution and the role of the Rulers in this country. Those reviewing school History syllabus and formulating a new one when History becomes a compulsory subject in schools in 2013 must address this problem.

Similarly, there is a lack of knowledge, or acceptance of the fact that the New Economic Policy is derived from the Special Position of the Malays. No doubt the NEP or some aspects of the NEP are not spelt out in the Constitution, but ask them which Constitution, or which legal document in the whole wide world for that matter, has everything spelt out in it. Discretion is vested in certain Clauses of the Constitution and a few clauses or sub-clauses may be subject to interpretation. But if not in contravention of the Sedition Act, people talk about any moot point, why can’t Perkasa and others “vow to defend them”?

Introducing it not long after the racial riots of 1969, the NEP was explained away in polite terms so as not to arouse further racial sentiments. The objective was written as the elimination of the identification of race with social functions, the bridging of the gap between the rich and the poor, helping the poor irrespective of race, etc. But clearly the vast majority of the poor were, and still are, the Malays.

And the National Operations Council records may still be classified documents but surely the original NEP policy planners had looked at and discussed the NEP in the context of the Special Position of the Malays. If people have been questioning the NEP – which was not done all those years previously until Pak Lah’s “flip flopping, auto-piloting and sleepy” rule – surely it is perfectly legitimate that “Perkasa and others have taken umbrage and have vowed to defend it”. Those people are seditious and should be charged in court,

Thank you for the link. It’s very interesting that a third party, and an academic who has apparently done some research on what have otherwise been deemed as the glories of Lee Kuan Yew and the Singapore Government, gives out frank views on the “charade of meritocracy in Singapore” and that it was published in the well regarded Far Eastern Economic Review. He is a brave and an honest man, running the risk of being denied entry the next time he lands at Singapore airport, or even charged or sued in court, like a British author had been recently. We have all along been pointing out about Singapore having “Big Brother on the wall”, always watching and listening to what residents there do or say.

Now it looks like the mischievous and chauvinistic Lee Kuan Yew who conceived and propagated the so-called Malaysian Malaysia concept when Singapore was in Malaysia 1963-65, asking for equality and meritocracy in Malaysia, has been hoodwinking, cheating and lying to everybody, including his own people. Damn the brat. His slogan was shouldered on by Lim Kit Siang and the DAP. Racist remarks and utterances along the meritocracy line were rampantly uttered and shouted about during the period prior to and during the 1969 general elections.

It was that kind of atmosphere that, when jubilant and rude DAP members and supporters shouted seditious words and demonstrated obscene behaviour during the election victory celebrations, the race riots of 13 May broke out. Some had even pointed out to Lee Kuan Yew starting all those because he introduced the meritocracy idea. Yet in Singapore he has been practising shitty meritocracy. Readers are well advised to read the link provided above. Including those who regard LKY as a demi-god and have been thinking the grass is greener the other side, even harbouring thoughts of migrating there.

For those already in Singapore, we know that they, like the meek and highly controlled citizenry, would not dare complain against the authorities. Some of them vent their frustration by complaining against the Malaysian government policies in blogs operated by Malaysians. For those who want to migrate to Singapore we wish them well. We however urge that they stay put there and not return or resettle in this country. Those that the Malaysian government wants to woo back to this country must be those whose sense of loyalty can be assessed realistically. Those who went to study abroad but did not return may be taken back. Those who have absconded of their own free will should not. We must have loyal citizenry for long term peace and harmony.

I think earlier than that – when Tun Dol started “flip flopping, auto-piloting and being sleepy”. He won handsomely in 2004 but let everything by, including his son in law and the “Fourth Floor boys” running the government, until people got fed up, many purposely spoilt their votes or didn’t bother to vote and some voted the opposition out of frustration in the 2008 General Election. The opposition got many votes but not because the people love them.

We are agreed that the politicising of the Social Contract has been going on for some time earlier, not suddenly, and on the description of Pak Lah’s administration. During Tun Dr Mahathir’s time, even questioning the NEP was not rampant; people respected the Social Contract, the Constitution or the Sedition Act. The attitude of the citizenry depends on the firmness and resoluteness of those who hold power. The greatness of the Romman Empire and the Empire eventually fell due to the lax attitude of the Emperors. The corrupt and “otak tak centre” Emperor Nero played the fiddle when Rome was burning.

There’s no two-way about it. Although the word Social Contract is never mentioned in the Constitution, elements of what has been known as the Social Contract have been incorporated into the Constitution of the country. They are the results of the negotiations between the leaders of the major communities during the years preceding Merdeka, of curse edged on or even squeezed by the “advice” of the colonial British. The Malay leaders agreed to citizenship for the non-Malays and the non-Malays agreed that the Malay Special Position be stated in the Constitution. The British Colonial Secretary said in the British Parliament in 1956 that the Malay Special Position has always been there “since day one”.

Corruption became rampant during Pak Lah’s rule. Former Inspector General of Police Tun Hanif Omar wrote in his column in The Star newspaper that a Director of then Anti-Corruption Agency told him that about 40% of the Police Officers in Bukit Aman could be arrested just on grounds of living beyond their means. Half-hearted attempt to remedy it came to nought. Commission of Inquiry was set up under former Chief Justice Tun Izaidin. Pak Lah flip flopped and did not implement the recommended setting up of an Independent Police Complaints and Management Commission, IPCMC. The “Fourth Floor Boys” comprising his son-in-law Khairy and group were meddling in the affairs of government, acting as proxies for Pak Lah.

The public started complaining in droves during Pak Lah’s time. In adequate action on seditious acts and utterances have emboldened the wayward fellows into being daring. DAP Tony Pua now dares to touch on the Bumiputera housing discount and MCA Chua Soi Lek dares to ask that the Malay equity target be abolished, prompting reactions asking their citizenship rights be also abolished. If Dato Seri Najib continues his current stand on Chinese schools, the NEP and other matters concerning the Social Contract, he will go into history either with the same fate as Pak Lah, or, if he wins big at the 13th General Elections, as a genius political strategist.

People in Malaysiakini say ZAINI HASSAN is seditious for asking the Government to take action against rampant discussions on racial issues – “menangani isu perkauman yang bebas diperdebatkan secara terbuka sekarang”. What utter rubbish. And they ask people to pay to read more also. Imagine that.

Those people in Malaysikini saying so are narrow-minded, motivated by their interest to promote the aims of their financiers i.e those in the opposition camp. The opposition wants to be able to say anything they like, irrespective of whether they touch on sensitive racial issues or not. It is, for example, plainly and simply seditious to ask for the Bumi equity target be abolished just as the reaction of asking the citizenship right of those asking so be abolished is also seditious.

The fact that for every seditious action there will be a seditious counter-action shows that it is dangerous to allow such acts to go on. They will go on if no stern action is taken on the perpetrators. What is wrong in asking that action be taken? It’s not logical, it’s incomprehensible for anybody to say that asking that action be taken on seditious fellows is seditious. It is warped thinking, it is even irresponsible, it is tantamount to complicity in the commission of legal or criminal offences.

Sedition is an act that causes ill feelings to another race. Asking the Bumi equity target be abolished certainly causes ill feelings to the Bumiputeras. It is therefore seditious. But it is not seditious for anybody to ask the Government to take action on those who ask for the Bumi equity target be abolished. It is wrong for the Malaysiakini people to say so or to allow others to say so in their portal without correcting them.

LEARN HISTORY LA, PEOPLE……… Malaysian Malaysia mengarut ,,,,,,,,,,,,,Got special position you know……..you also got legitimate interests protected ……… you kaya kaya, got 92% places in universities, what more you want?

The so-called Malaysian Malaysia slogan was conceived by Lee Kuan Yew when Singapore was in Malaysia 1963-65. That concept undermines or subverts the Special Position of the Malays and the Bumiputeras of Sabah and Sarawak. Clearly Article 153 of the Constitution recording the Special Position gives the Malays and the Bumiputeras certain rights and privileges that the non-Malays do not have because they were given citizenship right in exchange for that. Shouting Malaysian Malaysia without acknowledging the Special Position was mischievous. Then PM Tengku A Rahman let it be until it got out of hand and he “kicked Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore out of Malaysia” in 1965.

Lim Kit Siang and DAP, the splinter party of LKY’s PAP, hogged on the mischievous slogan. LKS was a hardcore and a relentless promoter of that slogan after LKY left the Malaysian scene. Fiery speeches became racial tirades against the Malays. Anything Malay or with Malay dominance e.g the Government, the Police, the then Anti-Corruption Agency and the Armed Forces were criticised and demonstrations were frequently carried out, often without Police permits. LKS was hauled in under the ISA on at least one occasion. They have since been asking that the ISA be abolished. They could not care less that even the United States practices ISA-like detention without trial in Guantanamo Bay.

The Chinese would not have become the wealthiest and control the economy of the country if their legitimate interests have not been protected. They have freedom to do any business they want although in Papua New Guinea, independent for nearly 40 years now, they are resented for doing even retail trade and opening grocery shops, on grounds that they are depriving the indigenous people of jobs. They are given licenses and facilities to do any business in this country and are the ones carrying out contract woks as main or sub-contractors, be they supplies, construction or whatever contracts they may be. The MCA President recently announced that 92% of Chinese students find places in institutions of higher learning and, despite being the wealthiest and having so many millionaire philanthropists, their top students are still given government scholarships.

Those shouting the slogan and making endless demands should indeed learn History. It’s good that History would be compulsory in schools beginning in 2013. The facts of history would show the need for affirmative action and the continuation of the NEP. It would also show that the Chinese have got so much since the 53 years of independence and their getting citizenship, and that they should be reasonable in their wants.

Your grasp of China and Chinese history is respectable, however, I am not sure if some points raised by you reflect truth or were put into the right perspective.

1) “Manchu Emperors gave them the “tongkat” by reserving 25% of the Civil Service posts for them.” – Hope you could provide link to substantiate this 25% claim, I am interesting to find out more. I do agree that many governments including China do have quota system for the weak and as far as I know, the quota is reserved for the Northerner as contrast to what you have said, the Southern part of China is more developed in term of economy and education most of the time. And perhaps the 25% reserve as claim by you is not in the ‘tongkat’ context. I would elaborate further after reading your link.

2) “Only months ago they had demonstrations in Canton and Hong Kong against the Central Government enforcing the use of their official language, Mandarin. The Malaysian Chinese are descended from the mainland southern Chinese.” – Not sure what exactly is your point. If Chinese Malaysian is mainly descendent of Southerner and base on the same logic, would it be very sensible that they would protest the imposed and enforced of any language that is not of their preference, in this case, the official language? Do you mean they are supposed to oppose Mandarin and not any other language?

3) “For lack of integration, China has been weak for a long, long time.” I appreciate your opinion but I think you need more historical fact to back up your claim, and to have a clear definition of ‘weak’ and ‘long time’. Just to share with you, the militarily strong Mongol that initiate an assimilation policy control China for less than 100 year while the Manchu that using a softer approach last more than 250 years. There are many reasons why a country could become weak and strong. Though integration could be one of them, we must first find out if the environment and conditions are fit for integration.

Archives

Archives

Disclaimer

This blog carries the personal views of several authors. Readers are cautioned not to consider the contents written in this blog and all its ancillary documents as a legal or contracting policy advice in any way. The information stated in this blog should not be relied upon as the ultimate reference of the truth. This blog is not responsible for the comments from the public, it therefore assumes no liability. This blog also disavows knowledge or culpability of any such acts or claims on such acts in any way related to the views and opinions expressed in this blog.